THE SPORTS CHANNEL LTD. v. ELIEZER TABIB
20-0859
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Jun 23, 2021Background
- Plaintiffs (appellee Tabib) sued The Sports Channel Ltd. and RGE Group Ltd.; defendants moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and on forum non conveniens grounds.
- The trial court denied both grounds in a non-final order; defendants appealed.
- For personal jurisdiction, the court applied Florida’s long-arm statute and relied on authority that posting electronic communications on a website accessible and accessed in Florida can constitute a tortious act subjecting a nonresident to jurisdiction.
- For forum non conveniens, the trial court denied dismissal but did not set forth a detailed analysis of the requisite Kinney factors in its written order or the hearing transcript.
- The appellate court affirmed the denial of dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction but reversed the denial as to forum non conveniens because the trial court failed to conduct the Kinney four-step analysis on the record and remanded for that analysis.
- The opinion reiterated that, although Cortez holds the burden is "especially high" for a foreign defendant to overcome a U.S. plaintiff’s forum choice, the trial court still must perform the Kinney inquiry.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Personal jurisdiction under Fla. long-arm statute (electronic postings) | Jurisdiction exists because defendants posted electronic communications accessible and accessed in Florida | No sufficient contacts; defendants not physically present in Florida | Affirmed: long-arm applies; website postings accessible in Florida can be tortious acts giving jurisdiction (per Estes) |
| Forum non conveniens dismissal (Kinney factors) | Trial court adequately considered Kinney at hearing; U.S. plaintiff’s forum choice should be preserved | Trial court erred by denying dismissal and failed to perform required Kinney analysis on the record | Reversed and remanded: trial court must conduct meaningful, on-the-record Kinney four-step analysis despite Cortez’s high presumption for U.S. plaintiff |
Key Cases Cited
- Estes v. Rodin, 259 So. 3d 183 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (a nonresident’s electronic communications on a website accessible and accessed in Florida can be a tortious act under the long-arm statute)
- Kinney Sys., Inc. v. Cont’l Ins. Co., 674 So. 2d 86 (Fla. 1996) (establishes the four-step forum non conveniens analysis trial courts must apply)
- Cortez v. Palace Resorts, Inc., 123 So. 3d 1085 (Fla. 2013) (U.S. plaintiff’s choice of forum is entitled to an "especially high" presumption where defendant is foreign)
- Poultry & Indus. Suppliers, Inc. v. Incubacol, S.A.S., 313 So. 3d 719 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (remand required where neither order nor transcript shows Kinney analysis; cannot apply Kinney for first time on appeal)
- Johnny’s Pool Super Ctr., Inc. v. Foreverpools Caribbean, LLC, 307 So. 3d 832 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (orders denying forum non conveniens are generally reversed when record lacks meaningful Kinney analysis)
- Tome v. Herrera-Zenil, 273 So. 3d 140 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019) (trial court’s written order must address Kinney factors or hearing transcript must show adequate on-the-record analysis)
- Camperos v. Estrella, 126 So. 3d 351 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (same principle: meaningful Kinney analysis required on the record)
- ABA Capital Mkts. Corp. v. Provincial de Reaseguros C.A., 101 So. 3d 385 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012) (remand not always required if the record shows the trial court considered Kinney at the hearing)